








V ^ " 1 * A 0 ^ 

* f • <* O . f) * , S # * /* V 

^ * *£• Ap' 

^ C.v' ♦ 


v> V 

v£> -G r 

: u^y • & 


^ *N 

r «* v>> . N 

* . x> V 


^\\\V * Cp ” n 

Mur* A ^ 

, ^ « a v & 

, * * ,6^ \D 



^va 


<. '« • '* * A 

V c° 

•w : __ 

*0 V*. * 4 O > * <0 rT 

b & * ifcwssA?*' ° <?~. ^ >» 

o 0 % *>w^ *> O ^0 % # * 

A 0 ^ * 0 « o <V °^ * " 1 * f° ^ 

5 \L^L% ^ V *’*°^ c\ <0^ * S M'* V 

‘ '. ** A 4Vr V / • 



<? °. y 


u • 

>« 

♦ 

t S 


* at?/! 

K &Ai\/ 

- r. 

yA^C _/7\ "*■ 


V -0 A <jJ 

A 0 "V * O - 0 9 Af 

*9 *l^L> > v 

0* ^ <•, *■ 


• ^ <(, ' 
\ W ^ 

V 



■* A y ' rU «* % v’ v ^ g) v * a/ o. ■» v 

G V ^ ^T* u <r '•.?• 0* V VT??* /\ 

r 0 ^ "% r 0> & !^ 0/r *^° 4^ 

Ci • n.^ O *i 1 nO^—t ■» ■*. G ♦ r-C'C s t\ *■ »1 .117 

* a^VvWt^ „ «N ♦ J^m/Z/P-. -« "TU . 


, «™™ - > j. 0 u- " ISI^v 4 °* -&M: >° ^ - 

%‘^V v®*/ v* 

f’*®- CV a0 s! *->* u v V + ' • o o *»••% ^ 

’•- ,es, L*, v /a u a ,’aVv ^ a 4, 


A U \a ♦ 

/ -o o 

V - eC ^ v VV^, .. 
o 



^ * ®«° 0 °*u * 9 •'* a 0 ’ 

* * '* *> V f y • °* o a0 s • v U > \r . T . o 

wK* 'mMA\ 



*y >4 



V 

•#• °A 


U ' 

/ a <P ^ 

0 

i , 


♦ jp/j 

K & II// 

//?2. 'T 7- 

r 

y-sK ^ < 


sga^. A v^ 

v ^ »?__ 

-.. s s /V <, '«.»* .o 1 

0 V 0° 

o > . r ^ Cr ® ^ 

. . '. i-* 1 vS 

.a A 'VUr- ri • <j 1^ O «- , 

<^> -°"°° y u * 

h> v k »^ <^ 

y \ \lsmi: a 

■ ,(y ^ A* 

^O 4 •‘’dUk*. ■’bv 4 :i 




,0 * 7 % 

N » ^ *> , 
X. 


°0 ^0° *^T° V °0 yi'y * f 0' ^ 

°- x> v % . JL * ^ c\ a 0 ^ *> 

^ * Sii® • rj* \v ♦ fCQCs^ A ^ 

°*W^. : y\ '-Xms °*ym : y 

4 ^o 4 :^K'. -o v 4 " 7 ^o< L 



v* 0^ 

° ^ ^ \ 

* * “ ' ’ y <V * • ' ’ • V 

^ v *!••- o. a0 ^*^L'-v ^ 

^ -G ' K % r. Ta AT 

* * rCUgSfA • 

.* /A A\ y 

<y &■ *p*mwr‘>> . v -o' 


v ^ 

iP '7% *„ h o. > yA. 

^ - , i .^S! y • -a.^ CV * ^i 

V. ♦•-•• ^ °*U * 

V ^Ox 

* J '- ..^o A 

,* 4fl 


v^eOvH 1 * «/ ^ • 

* ^ y * A V V A 

'o * * - ,0 Y \3 



\r 

\ 


<3 








V 




C\ 

u o 

r 8 <? 

’-nis?**. ^ «• -yiw* y y. •, 

' *•• *<P <v »* ,G* *b 

O \‘v , 1. • a X n v o * o X* 

i~!> t _ X ,»vj o __ ♦ _ C 


v *7^ 

X\ * © N 


„* p o .^f,' 0 ->W.' ,?•' o *.^K* ■ 

>* ... •*•„ ••’ y... y *«- ° ’ y °*. *•■'• y ->, -. 

' y<* *y. <%p V vV4>C% ^ , v c> <y , s * * % *> 

O vP^ C S „ J=lli2$ rJ* A v *mfA° ^rv A ♦ cy»0fc • 

* 'T ? !^!!!^: v* v r^g^pt ^ s s ° / ^®M: 

a\ '<*- ~ * * 

A 




0 

V^V V-. 

.•«, ^ 4? X 4, • <*> A^ vV^% ^ 

% O vP A * X ♦rOCvStfA 0 cy * CSSiS^ • 

w/k\ '$My/Zh 0 °b<y o yilli^ - 

S * ay o^iOeAK * a/ 4 °x • 

S 4 A <y ' o . * *•- 0^ \D * 

«^ l I & X* /\ V 0*0 f ^_ 

.-©- t * X> r U o " ♦ ^ O 

y * j&rfl77?2 . ’ C ’c^y, O 

• 4 


'<*< 
c y" 

wr*’.^' ^ v'^ v V ^ 

• s 4 A <> « 0 V 

. ^ t ' . ^ ^ qV o o * 

. ^ y rr ^ 

<a iy *» ^Wl//yC^ > "* X> •<! 

. o V . j 


»- ^*0^ 
* 4 



- * *4«w - 0 y ^ y °^ 

r^ > 'Kyr • at o P'\\\Vy 1 \ 4 ^ N v 

^*'*0° / °X* " " 1 * ^ 0 ^ * • * 0 ° ^ 

-v x> V • y * cv aO v 

* x- '‘t^slTA'' ^(s cy 

: W 

% o A Vy 

* y °i ^ ,,ni ^ 



„ ^ ^ V'V 

* o ^ * /b X s a ^ 

• ^.4JLl>xl ^ A > v\ M/ kS\n ^ A-* ^ 4 \ 0 

^ aV 

' .. s 4 A <y 'o • * * K (y vd 

4 ^ v / a X V o M o 

.''sml- + C° °v 


y 



- • * <0 

\d + A; S » a 

flB, „ o' & ° ° *^o «»■ 1 

”• '^o ^ ^ o 4 ^o y ; 

° y ^ ' 7 ^i. * 

c^. ->' « a p o ».^coo^y 0 ~*. ‘ 

^ *... • y % * * ■ ’ • ^° \ ‘o. 

'- > v c> .0 ,•"', X 

x- a v ^ A A <^ A <A ♦ . 'x. 

V^ J*® 1 , ^ V” • ^iliS. r 

■'-•* <4. 



o. yb x 
^ * A yx 

• ^ ^9'-t -a. v -» 

<y "o, * - V + 

x y> o n o 

C° -^55^1% °o 

< V* 0 V 

4 4 _ 




° l /// »«\\v c 
S .y^NK/ V 

<■. -<...* ,<y 


5^ 


y 

«, 'x A *' 

u *-> 

* -a.^ cv * i* «o «► 

v -:••»' c\ y av,‘% X 

y ava % y y 

<f> ^ « 4i^^ 


® / 


^ v % 1* ’ * °- 

/V - 

® a v, V aV^ 

* 'V °* ec >)\< V X * 

^ A xy *-o, y' ,0^ ^b - 

A 0 ,? o^ ^ r c> 


































National Republican Print. 
















































Captain S. L. Phelps’ pamphlet is so full of errors that 
a brief exposure of them is necessary to prevent wrong im¬ 
pressions. 

It contains insincere statements of facts about which he is 
no doubt fully informed ; and absurd errors in naval architec¬ 
ture and civil engineering, which betray a lamentable want 
of knowledge of some of the simplest physical laws. To 
give an idea of the number of these errors, I will enumerate 
them ?.s I proceed, and leave the reader to refer each to its 
proper origin. 

1st. Captain Phelps refers to General Barnard’s survey of 
the Isthmus of Tehuantepec, made twenty years ago, to show 
that the grades and curves for a ship railway must be 
excessive, but he is quite silent about other surveys for rail¬ 
ways made since, which have developed better lines. He 
says: “ If a ship can be hauled up gradients of 115 to 150 
feet per mile, then the elevations can be surmounted, pro¬ 
vided the ship can first be changed sufficiently in inclination 
to the horizontal.” 

Mr. E. A. Fuertes, an eminent civil engineer, now Dean 
f the Department of Civil Engineering in Cornell Univer¬ 
sity, was chief engineer of Commodore Shufeldt’s expedi¬ 
tion which surveyed the Isthmus only nine years ago. In 
a recent letter to me he says: “ I can assure you, upon 
knowledge of every inch of the ground, that you will find 
no difficulty about curves, grades or bridges. The ascent of 
the Atlantic slope will offer no more difficulties than the 
Hudson Diver Railroad, and on the Pacific side, either one 
of the three passes in the neighborhood of Tarifa or Chivela 



2 


will allow of no steeper grades than 25 to 35 feet per mile 
to bring you down to the Pacific plains.” 

2d. Captain Phelps says: “ The displacement of a num¬ 
ber of steamships in service, indicate weights of ship and 
cargo reaching from 9,000 to 12,000 tons, their length being 
from 450 to 500 feet and upwards. Hence ability to carry 
a ship and cargo weighing 12,000 tons is necessary.” 

Captain Phelps cannot cite a single merchant steamer in 
service (the Great Eastern excepted) whose displacement is 
9,000 tons when loaded, much less 12,000. Lloyds’ register 
will show that 90 percent, of the world’s commerce is carried 
in vessels, the largest of which will not, when loaded, weigh 
over 4,000 tons. But three steamers in the world (ex¬ 
cept the Great Eastern) are in service that exceed 450 feet. 
These are the Britannic and Germanic, which only exceed it 
by five feet, and the City of Berlin which is 488 feet long. 
One or two are building that are over 500 feet, but they 
are not in service. 

3rd. Captain Phelps declares that tilting tables to change 
the grades on the road will weigh 24,000 tons each, and says : 
“ This change in inclination would become necessary many 
times in the distance across the Isthmus.” 

The tilting tables, if necessary, would not weigh more 
than one-tenth of 24,000 tons. But the surveys already 
made, and those referred to by Mr. Fuertes, prove that the 
grades are so easy that such devices as tilting tables will he 
wholly unnecessary. 

4th. Captain Phelps says, under the head of “ Change of 
Direction:” “ This would be frequently necessary in that 
mountain country and can only be effected by use of turn¬ 
tables, which must be 500 feet, or more, in diameter, and 
must carry 24,000 tons and their own weight, which would 
probably approximate to the weight carried, or say another 
24,000 tons and the whole weight would again be 48,000 
tons, more or less.” 

Surveys thus far made, show that but three turn-tables to 


3 


change the direction of the road, will be necessary. Careful 
estimates prove that the car to carry the ship will not weigh 
more than one-quarter as much as the heaviest vessels to be 
transported or say 1,500 tons. This with 6,000 tons for the 
ship and 500 for the engines would be but 8,000 tons on the 
turn-table, instead of 24,000. Pivot drawbridges are now 
in use on the Mississippi River which are 460 feet long. A 
turn-table for the ship railway will be no longer, and with 
its wheels, &c., would not weigh one-tenth as much as 
Captain Phelps asserts. Hence with a 6,000 ton ship the 
entire load, turn-table and all, would not be one-quarter of 
48,000 tons. 

5th. He estimates k the ship and the car, cradles and sup¬ 
ports to carry the ship, at 24,000 tons. 

This estimate is three times as great as it should be. 

6th. He says: u The model of the ship must be known 
that cradles and supports can be made in advance to accu¬ 
rately fit her form.” 

Without investigating the strength of ships, he has 
adopted the popular error that their sides are so weak that 
supports must be put all around them when out of 
water. If a barrel of beans be afloat, the water will support 
its sides just as it does a ship, but it does not follow 
that it must be carefully laid on supports, hollowed out to 
fit it, when taken out of the water. The supports on which 
the ship rests in a dock are placed chiefly under her keel, 
and the remainder under the flatter parts of her bottom. By 
very simple devices these are made adjustable to suit a vari¬ 
ety of vessels of similar tonnage. A number of different 
sized cars would be provided to suit the different classes of 
vessels. The same car that would be suitable for large steam¬ 
ers would not be used for sailing vessels. 

7th. He says: “ No two vessels have the same form and 
cradles must be fitted for each vessel carried.” 

This statement is likewise erroneous. The Germanic and 
Britannic are alike in form ; so are the Baltic and Oceanic ; 


4 


so too are the Celtic and Adriatic. I could name scores of 
vessels whose forms are alike, if I had space. 

8th. The Captain says: u Builders, owners, seamen, and 
underwriters all condemn the railway plan as impracticable, 
if for no other reason than that ships cannot be taken out of 
water safely with cargo on board. 7 ’ 

Here are three distinct misstatements: 1st. Builders do 
not all do any such thing. Messrs. Edward Hartt and 
F. L. Fernald, of the United States Navy, and E. J. Reed, 
of the British Navy, are builders whose scientific educa¬ 
tion and practical experience in constructing wooden and 
iron ships of the largest sizes, entitle their opinions to 
the highest possible degree of respect; and they have de¬ 
clared over their own signatures that the proposed ship rail¬ 
way is not only entirely practicable, but, for several reasons, 
is superior to a canal. 2nd. Seamen do not all condemn it. 
Commodore Shufeldt, Captain Silas Bent, and Commander 
Farquhar, seamen whose education in the United States 
Navy and whose standing and experience entitle them 
to quite as much respect as Captain Phelps enjoys, do not 
condemn it, but encourage me to go on with the work. 
3rd. It is untrue that ships cannot be taken out of water 
safely with cargo on board. A letter dated February 
14tli, from Mr. William F. Buckley, President of the New 
York Balanced Dock Company, gives the following list 
of vessels taken out on his dock with cargoes in them: 

Ship Great Victoria, 2,386 tons. 

“ Triumphant, 2,046 tons. 

“ America, 2,054 tons. 

“ Hagerstown, 1,903 tons. 

“ S. C. Blanchard, 1,903 tons. 

Steamer Colorado, 2,765 tons. 
u Rio Grande, 2,565 tons. 

“ Thingvalla, 2,436 tons. 

“ Monarch, 2,366 tons. 

w Lepanto, 2,310 tons. 

“ State of Nevada, 2,488 tons. 


5 


Mr. Buckley in his letter says u We do not refuse any 
class of ships or steamers, even with their coals and cargoes 
on board, whose length does not exceed the length of the 
dock. In every case in which we have taken up steamers 
with cargo in, it has been done without the least strain or 
injury to the vessel. As the rule is to make a charge for 
raising cargo in the vessel, they usually come to us without 
cargo.” 

11th. Starting on the hypothesis that vessels will weigh 
two or three times as much as they really do, and that the cars 
must be three times as heavy as need be, the captain says: 
“ Allowing five tons pressure upon each wheel under the 
ship-car, there would be required 4,800 wheels. These placed 
at three feet center to center, would require 14,400 feet of rails, 
or twenty-eight rails of 500 feet in length,or two and one-third 
times more than Captain Eads adopts ; and the rails, if under 
the ship, would hardly be twenty inches apart!” 

If Captain Phelps had indulged in a greater flight of 
fancy, and started with ships of fifty thousand tons weight, 
he could have drawn conclusions still more startling and 
equally unreliable. 

12th. The Captain makes the following remarkable state¬ 
ment: u When in motion the ship would practically rest upon 
four points. When cars have four wheels the weight is 
equally distributed over them ; add two wheels, and four of 
the six will still carry the load, but the weight will be trans¬ 
ferred momentarily according to deviation in the plane 
passed over. This source of disaster from overloaded wheels 
would be a constant danger.” 

This is the sheerest nonsense imaginable. Mr. J. J. Mann 
superintendent of the Chicago, St. Louis and New Orleans 
Railway, informs me that the two-story brick depot in 
Jackson, Tennessee, was moved 700 feet north, and twenty 
feet east of its original location. It is 140 feet long and 40 
feet wide. It weighed vastly more than the Egyptian obe¬ 
lisk recently erected in New York, and was moved without 


6 


cracking its walls. It had probably 500 rollers under it. 
Captain Phelps would lead the reader to believe that it 
must have rested at times upon only four of them. The 
same building could be moved 7,000 feet or 700,000 feet in 
the same manner and with equal safety. 

13th. The Captain says: “In a distance of 150 to 180 miles 
there must be several sidings for passing ships and many 
“ turn-tables,” beside frequent tilting-tables for changing the 
inclination of the ships to the horizontal.” 

Evidently Captain Phelps had forgotten that in another 
part of his pamphlet he says: “ The ship railway involves 
about as much Canal as the Nicaragua route.” And in 
another, that, “ the Isthmus is 143.5 miles wide.” The Cap¬ 
tain should have a better memory. 180 miles of railway and 
173 miles of canal is rather too long to get across an isthmus 
only 143.5 miles wide. 33 miles will be river navigation 
and 12 miles of bay, leaving about 100 miles of railway. 

14th. He says: “ The weight to be transported is equiva¬ 
lent in amount to over 1,200 freight cars, and their load.” 

I have shown that the maximum weight to be transported 
is only 8,000 tons. Hence it is only equal to 400 freight 
cars and their loads. 

15th. The captain gives his readers the following sample 
of his knowledge of railway engineering. “The ship 
in view is one-tenth of a mile in length. A change in 
the inclination of the road-bed from the horizontal to 
grades of ten, twenty, lifty or more feet in a mile would 
suspend this vessel by the ends while entering upon the 
new gradient. At one point the ship’s middle portion 
would be, in such changes, from six inches to two and one- 
half feet, and so on, above the level of the platform car, 
and would not therefore rest in the cradle at all.” 

Now let us suppose the grade is ten feet in a mile. In the 
length of the ship which is the tenth of a mile it would be 
one foot. Let us suppose the worst possible case, that where 
the change of grade is made abruptly from a level plane 


7 


When the ship has advanced half her length up the grade, 
one end will be just six inches higher than the other, and 
the angle where the grade changes will only be three inches 
further from the ship than if the change did not occur; 
just half as much as Captain Phelps states it. This is the posi¬ 
tion where the middle of the ship, if absolutely rigid, would 
be at the greatest distance from the track. Hence if the ship 
be 528 feet or one-tenth of a mile long, and a grade of 50 
feet be made to form an angle with a level plane, the middle 
of the ship can only be one and one-fourth feet further from 
the angle, and not two and one half feet, as stated. It is easy 
to see that if the grade line and the level were united by a 
vertical curve only as long as the ship, with a versed sine or 
deflection of seven and one-half inches, the middle of the ship 
would then only he half as far from the track. But there 
is no reason why this curve should be limited to the length 
of the ship. The change of grade may be made in one or 
two, or even three miles, instead of at one point, and the 
possible bending of the ship will be thus almost wholly 
prevented. The great box tubes of the Britannia bridge 
are nearly 500 feet long and are as strong as any ship, 
yet they bent several inches with their own weight when 
erected, and are deflected from one to three inches more with 
every passing train. A ship 528 feet long would bend six 
inches in her length without injury, but on the ship railway 
the change of the grade will be so gradual that no percepti¬ 
ble bending can occur. 

16th. The captain says: u A ship while out of water is 
the heaviest of structures for its strength.” 

This is wholly erroneous. Very few ships are as heavy as 
the brick depot that was moved so far in Jackson, Tennes¬ 
see. Yet any ship of half its weight is vastly stronger. Hence 
it is a much lighter structure for its strength. 

17th. The captain thus displays his knowledge of physics. 
He says : “ Resting in the water, the ship is sustained by a 
medium entirely surrounding the bottom and pressing in 
equal force upon every inch of its surface.” 


8 


This is a mistake. The water presses against the deeper 
parts with greater force than it does against the parts not so 
deep. The pressure at any point depends upon the vertical 
height of the water above that point. 

18th. Again: we are told; “ Whether rolling or pitching, 
the support from the water is uniform, at all times and at all 
points.” 

This is a most astonishing statement, when we remember 
that it comes from one who was once a captain in the United 
States navy. In storms the pressure upon any one part of 
the hull is constantly changing. If the support were “uni¬ 
form at all times, and at all points,” such a thing as a ship 
being strained in a storm or foundering at sea would be 
unheard of. 

19th. Captain Phelps tells us: “Moreover there is com¬ 
paratively little motion in the bottom of the vessel, what¬ 
ever there may be 30, 40, or 50 feet above it, because motions 
at sea are from the bottom as the centre.” 

This will be news to naval architects who have hitherto 
carefully considered the various weights, and their positions 
in the ship, to determine the centre of gravity and the 
metacentre of the vessel, so as to secure the greatest degree 
of steadiness for her. Captain Phelps has made the novel 
discovery that the bottom of the ship and not her centre of 
gravity, is the centre of motion. 

Captain Coles, R. K, the builder of the celebrated 
and unfortunate British turreted ship “ Captain,” made 
the same mistake on this point that Captain Phelps has 
made, and it cost him his life. The centre of gravity of 
motion in the “ Captain ” was so high (that is, so near the 
metacentre) that when the ship got to rolling, a slight squall 
was sufficient to overturn her. She carried Captain Coles 
and almost every soul on board to the bottom. This could 
not have occurred if “ motions at sea are from the bottom as 
the centre.” The centre of motion in this case was prob¬ 
ably 30 feet above the bottom. 


9 


I was in England when the Captain was being built and 
desiring some information about her, I sought Mr. E. J. 
Reed, the chief constructor of the navv, and learned from 
him, with surprise, that he had nothing to do with her, as 
she was placed by the government wholly under the charge 
of Captain Coles, because he, Reed, had disapproved of Coles’ 
designs. The sequel proved that a man educated to navi¬ 
gate a ship is not always familiar with the scientific princi¬ 
ples involved in her construction and servitude; and still 
less frequently is he competent to apply them in practice. 
Ship-building has, in the present century, advanced from 
the category of mechanic arts. It is now recognized as one 
of the sciences. Some of the ablest mathematicians and 
engineers of the present age have devoted years of labor in 
elucidating the principles involved in its problems. 

It is true that many ships, probably the majority of them, 
are built by men wholly unfamiliar with the mathematical 
processes by which the various members of the vessel are 
proportioned ; but these have been tabulated in what are 
known as Lloyd’s rules. These rules require that vessels of 
certain tonnage shall have plates, beams, ribs, kelsons, &c., 
of certain dimensions in certain parts of the ship, while 
these dimensions are again modified according to the pro¬ 
portionate length, breadth, and depth of the vessel. Unless 
vessels when completed are built in accordance with these 
rules, the Underwriters decline to insure them, or charge 
increased rates for so-doing. Hence, a mechanic familiar 
with plate-iron work, or boiler making, may establish a ship 
yard, and if possessed of sufficient knowledge of the art of 
ship building to transfer the lines of a small model to the floor 
of his moulding loft, may, by the observance of Lloyd’s 
rules become a successful builder, without knowing much 
more about the science of ship building than Captain Phelps 
does. Such builders may upon the solicitation of Captain 
Phelps, declare the ship railway totally impracticable. But 


10 


certainly the opinion of such persons should not be put in 
the scale against men like E. J. Reed, Edward Hartt and F. 
L. Fernald, constructors who have studied the science ot ship 
building as a profession; who are competent to revise 
Lloyd’s rules; to determine the intensity of any strain 
to which a vessel may be subjected, in the water, or out of 
it; to ascertain its ability to resist such strain ; and who 
have an extensive practical experience in the mechanical 
details of their profession. 

20th. Captain Phelps says: “The Suez Canal, 100 miles 
long, costs $800,000 yearly. The Nicaragua Canal proper is 
53.17 miles long.” 

The reader would infer from this deceptive statement that 
the Suez canal is nearly twice as long as the Nicaragua. 
Much of the Nicaragua route lies through the Lake and 
much of the Suez route is through the Bitter Lakes. These 
had to be dredged to deepen them, and much dredging must 
be done through Lake Nicaraugua to deepen it. When 
storms prevail this part will be very difficult to navigate, 
as vessels will be liable to be blown out of the cut and stuck 
in the mud. They frequently ground in the lakes at Suez. 
It requires two days- to pass through the Suez canal, al¬ 
though it is only 96 miles long. As the Nicaragua route 
is nearly twice as long, it would probably take three or four 
days to go through it, if, like the Suez canal, it had no locks; 
but as it must have many locks, these will add another day 
or two of delay. The French engineers, knowing the great 
danger of accidents to the locks, as well as their delay, wisely 
determined to have none of them at Panama. 

21st. The statement that the Suez Canal cost but $800,000 
yearly is another error. I have before me the report of the 
three British directors, (given to me by one of them) in 
which it is stated that it cost in 1878, 6,248,663 francs 
which is equal to $1,249,732, or nearly 57 per cent, more 
than Captain Phelps would make the reader believe. 

22nd. Captain Phelps says: “As projected, the railway 


11 


scheme involves about as much canal as the Nicaragua route, 
and will have two locks.” 

Here are two misstatements, and it can scarcely be possible 
that Captain Phelps was ignorant of the facts in either case. 
1st. It is not contemplated to have a canal through more 
than live or ten miles of swamp to connect the Uspanapa 
River with the firm lands beyond; 2nd. There will be no 
locks at all in the entire route. The two ends of the rail¬ 
way extend, with a grade of but one foot in one hundred, 
down under water far enough to float the vessel over the 
car that is to carry it. Hence locks will be unnecessary. 

24th. Captain Phelps says: “The distance saved for 
steamers by way of Tehuantepec between the Atlantic and 
Pacific ports of our country would be only 510 miles, as com¬ 
pared with the distance via the Nicaragua route.” 

This statement is probably made on a system of general 
average. Having extravagantly overstated so many other 
matters the Captain evidently wishes to average his 
errors by extravagantly understating this distance. Hon. 
C. P. Patterson, Superintendent of the Coast Survey, in 
forms me that the difference in favor of the Tehuantepec 
route from the mouth of the Mississippi to San Francisco, 
over the Nicaragua route, is 1193 nautical miles; or 1372 
statute miles. And that between New York and San Fran¬ 
cisco it is 753 nautical or 860 statute miles. 

25th. He says: “ The estimated cost of the canal is $41,- 
000,000 ; that of the railway, for which no surveys have been 
made, is $75,000,000. Doubling these estimates to cover all 
kind of contingencies, will make the canal cost $82,000,000, 
and the railway $150,000,000.” 

As he is no doubt familiar with his own estimates we 
must concede to him the right to double them as often as he 
thinks necessary. But being satisfied with the estimates we 
have made for the ship railway, and which Captain Phelps 
has never seen, we object to his increasing them simply be¬ 
cause he finds his canal estimates so largely understated. 


12 


26th. The Captain says: “ Ten million gross receipts 
for the railway, would, after deducting 60 per cent 
for expenses, leave $4,000,000 net, or 2§ per cent, on outlay. 
The average expenses of railways bear a larger ratio to re¬ 
ceipts than 60 per cent., and it cannot be doubted that, if in 
any degree practicable, the ship railway would be enor¬ 
mously expensive in proportion to gross receipts.’’ 

Here the Captain is again mistaken ; several first-class 
roads are worked for less than 50 per cent., and they handle 
their cargoes by hand. In the ship railway it would be 
handled exclusively by machinery, thus greatly reducing 
the expense, and as every thing must be of the most sub¬ 
stantial character, the ratio of expense of maintenance 
will be much less than with ordinary roads. 

27th. Captain Phelps says further: “ The United States 
are asked to fasten this needless tax on the country, and to 
do it by putting up a vast sum of money to try an experi¬ 
ment for which a favorable result cannot be anticipated.” 

I can only account for this inexcusable misstatement by 
the fact that Captain Phelps had become so careless in 
making the twenty-six others which I have already ex¬ 
posed, that he determined to “ cap the climax” in this 
one. 

The United States is not asked to put up a vast sum of 
money to try an experiment. It is not asked to put up a 
dollar for any such purpose, and if the Nicaragua scheme can 
only win support by such totally unfounded statements as 
these, its intrinsic merit must be small indeed. The “ exper¬ 
iment,” as Captain Phelps calls it, is to be made by private 
capital alone. Ten miles of railway with its requisite cars, 
engines, &c., and the terminal works for taking a ship, 
weighing with her cargo 2,000 tons, out of the water on 
to the road, is to be built with private capital. When this 
is done, if the experiment of transporting this loaded ship 
without injury at 6 miles per hour over the road is a 
failure, the United States loses absolutely nothing. Only af- 


13 


ter this has been successfully done is the Government liable, 
and then for only 6 per cent, dividends on $5,000,000 stock. 
The total amount of stock to be guaranteed is but f 
of the amount of the $75,000,000 required to build the road. 
Like amounts of stock are only to be guaranteed as other sec¬ 
tions are finished and tested. The tests increase in severity 
from time to time; the last $10,000,000 guaranteed,depends 
upon the safe transportation of a ship, weighing with her 
cargo 4,000 tons, over the entire line at 6 miles per hour. 
A ship of this size would be taken for the first test, but the 
harbors must be deepened before so large a ship could enter 
them. This is as large as any ship which has yet visited 
New Orleans, although there has been 30 feet depth through 
the jetties for the last eighteen months. Captain Phelps 
declares at one moment that this cannot be done, and 
in the next he betrays his fear that it can be, by striv¬ 
ing to prevent me from doing it at my own cost and 
risk. To defeat a trial of the experiment he does not hesi¬ 
tate, as we have seen, to make a statement which totally 
misrepresents the facts, and actually tells the reader that the 
United States is asked “ to put up a vast sum of money to try 
an experiment for which a favorable result cannot be an¬ 
ticipated.” 

I have not space to follow Captain Phelps through the mis¬ 
representations, absurdities, and nonsense with which his 
pamphlet abounds, but which are nevertheless so stated as to 
mislead many intelligent persons who do not take the time to 
examine the subject. The twenty-seven which I have pointed 
out show that he knows nothing about the principles of the 
problem he undertakes to argue, and that he is very reckless 
and unfair in his statements. 

As it is not to he supposed that his pamphlet could have 
been published without being first examined and approved 
by the chief promoter of the Nicaraguan scheme, Admiral 
Ammen, he must, unless it be disavowed, become equally 
responsible for its ridiculous blunders and deceptive state¬ 
ments. 


14 


To avoid discussing the real merits of my proposition, other 
unfair opponents strive to create the impression that I am ask¬ 
ing a government guarantee to pay for making an experi¬ 
ment. The guarantee is not asked to pay for an experiment, 
successful or unsuccessful. It is asked in consideration 
of certain valuable benefits which my grant from Mexico 
enables me to give to the United States, or to any other 
government which will aid the construction of the Ship 
Railway. 

In consideration of the guarantee I agree 1st, to trans¬ 
port the war vessels, troops, property and mails of the 
United States free for 99 years. 2nd. To give to it the right 
to reduce the tolls on the road. 3rd. The right to discrim¬ 
inate in favor of its own commerce and that of Mexico, 
when fixing the tolls. 4th. To transport no vessels of war 
belonging to any nation at war with the United States, and 
5th. To pay back to the United States every dollar that may 
be advanced under her guarantee. 

As the ship railway is opposed on the ground that it is an 
untried experiment, the actual demonstration of its practica¬ 
bility is to be made at the risk of myself and associates, be¬ 
fore any liability on the part of the United States can pos¬ 
sibly take effect. And as it is charged that my grant from the 
Government of Mexico does not authorize 7ne to give to the 
United States the above valuable advantages, the guarantee 
is also not to take effect until after the Mexican Congress 
shall have signified its assent to the proposed agreement. 

Captain Phelps shows his unfairness in the premises by 
republishing in his pamphlet the misstatements of the New 
York Times of February 3rd, conveying certain false im¬ 
pressions which were fully exposed and corrected by 
me a few days afterward. The Times lays much stress upon 
the fact that the grant contains a clause which declares that 
“ The company shall be Mexican even though some or all of 
its shareholders be foreigners, and shall be subject exclu¬ 
sively to the jurisdiction of the tribunals of the Republic 


15 


in all matters of which the cause of action may take 
place within its territory.” It will be seen that the 
proposition made by me to the United States does not 
propose to give to it any right of eminent domain on Mexi¬ 
can soil, nor any right to interfere in the control of the road. 
It will, if accepted, be simply an agreement between the 
ship railway company and the United States, sanctioned by 
Mexico. Mexico could not give to the United States the 
right to discriminate in favor of our commerce on the rail¬ 
way without conceding to other nations with whom it has 
treaties, the same advantages. The usual treaty clause 
which provides that the nation making the treaty shall en¬ 
joy all the rights and privileges of the most favored nations, 
would give to each nation having such treaty with Mexico 
the same right in favor of her commerce. By the concess¬ 
ion, however, she gives the company the right to charge 
certain maximum rates of toll, and leaves it optional with 
it to charge as much less as it pleases. It does not impose 
upon the company any obligation to make the tolls uniform 
to all nations. The grant requires that the road shall be 
open to the commerce of all nations at peace with Mexico, 
and they will have a right to use it at the maximum rates 
of tolls, or at such lower rates as it may suit the interests 
of the company to fix. It does not require the company to 
transport the war vessels of any nation but Mexico. Nor 
does it forbid the transit of such vessels belonging to other 
nations except in case of war. 

The grant was drawn for a different purpose from that 
which was contemplated by either the Panama or the Nica¬ 
ragua concessions. They are for the benefit of Europe first 
and of America afterwards. This is the American route, 
and the ship railway is for the benefit of the commerce 
of North America first and that of the world afterwards. 
It is the American route because it is 1,500 miles nearer by 
it from our ports on the Atlantic to those on the Pacific, 
and 2,200 miles nearer from the mouth of the Mississippi to 


16 








our Pacific ports than it is by Panama ; and although these 
distances are somewhat less by Nicaragua, the greater delay 
in passing through the latter route would destroy all 
benefit which the saving in distance would otherwise make. 
Mexico gives most valuable aid to the enterprise and 
she has a right to expect benefits greater than those 
which are to he enjoyed by nations who give no aid to it. 
If the United States aids it, she will enjoy all the ad¬ 
vantages reserved to Mexico, and discriminations will be 
made by the company, in favor of the commerce of the two 
countries in consideration of the aid which they give 
to the company. Mexico gives authority to the com¬ 
pany to secure aid from some other government and 
it prescribes the manner of doing it. Like any other 
nation that has achieved its independence, it is jealous 
of any foreign domination of its territory, and hence 
it declares that any sale, mortgage, or transfer of the 
railway, franchise, or lands of tlie company to any other 
government, shall work a forfeiture of the grant ; but it de¬ 
clares that the company may hypothecate the revenues of 
the road to any other government that will aid it with 
money or guarantees, provided the terms of such hypothe¬ 
cation do not conflict with the other provisions of the 
grant, that is to say: provided the company does not 
give to such government the right to take possession of the 
road, or the right to operate it; or to acquire title to its lands. 
It gives to such government only the right to intervene 
through the courts of Mexico, in case of any bad faith of the 
company, and to have receivers appointed by its courts 
to collect the revenues and disburse them according 
to the terms of the agreement with the company. Any 
one who supposes that any independent government 
would consent that another government should enter 
upon its territory and take charge of a railway within 
its borders, or come into possession of any important 
works upon its soil, knows but little of international affairs. 


17 


The United States would scarcely be able to make such an ar¬ 
rangement with any one of the weak States of Central Amer¬ 
ica that requires its protection. It has no right to ask of 
Mexico that which it would not itself grant to any other 
independent government. Mexico will protect the United 
States in the full enjoyment of all the benefits the ship rail¬ 
way company offers to give her, and that is all she needs. 
When she refuses to recognize and consent to the terms I 
offer to the United States, it will be time enough for Cap¬ 
tain Phelps and Admiral Ammen to repeat the Times’ mis¬ 
statements. 

Captain Phelps closes his pamphlet with several letters 
expressing adverse opinions as to the practicability of the 
Ship Railway. In one of these Mr. John Roach says: “ In 
my opinion a ship or steamer of large dimensions cannot in 
safety be taken out of the water with cargo on board, as 
there would be great danger of injury to the hull, and 
consequently cannot be safely transported with cargo on a 
Ship Railway. 7 ' 

As Mr. Buckley gives the names of five large ships and 
six large steamers that were taken out on his dock with 
their cargoes on board, and without injury, it is evident 
that Mr. Roach’s opinion is based upon incorrect premises, 
and is therefore without value. Several large vessels have 
been taken out with their cargoes on board, in the docks 
and on the ways of Messrs. Cramp and Sons, of Phila¬ 
delphia, and others have been taken out on other docks, 
besides Mr. Buckley’s, in Yew York, but I have not yet 
had time to ascertain the names and sizes of these vessels. 

In a printed letter, addressed to Plon. J. Floyd King, 
over the signature of Admiral Ammen, the above letter of 
Mr. Roach is preceded by the following: 

“ The Yew York Herald of March 10th, 1880, states that 
Captain Eads said before this committee that E. J. Reed, 
formerly Chief Yaval Constructor of Great Britain, Mr. 
John Roach an eminent ship builder, and Mr. Henry Steers, 
had received his plans with favor.” 


18 


I have never stated to any body that Mr. Roach received 
my plans with favor. I stated to the committee referred to, 
that in answer to my question as to how mucli Mr. Roach 
thought the bow and stern of a ship 450 feet long could be 
jacked up without danger to the ship and without lifting 
her off the central blocks, that he had replied : “ 6 inches.” 
This is the extent of my statement respecting the opinion 
of Mr. Roach. 

After the letter of Mr. Roach, however, is this statement. 
“ ¥m. II. Webb, Esq., the celebrated ship builder, concurs 
in this opinion.” 

Mr. Wm. II. Webb informs me that this statement was 
published without authority, and 'that he never expressed 
such concurrence of opinion. 

Admiral Ammen in the letter referred to makes the 
following statement also: 

“ The first proposition I saw published by Captain Eads, 
referred to the transportation of water-borne vessels. The 
letter of Mr. Reed, published in the Washington Rost to-day, 
would seem to refer to similar conditions.” 

The impression herein conveyed is, that I was then 
proposing to transport ships in caissons or tanks of water. 
I have never proposed any such thing, nor does Mr. Reed’s 
letter convey the impression that he proposed such method. 

A letter from Messrs. Harlan & Hollingsworth is Hven 

by Captain Phelps in which they say : “ If the foundation 
of the railroad, having six tracks, could be made substantial 
so as not to yield under the immense weight of a loaded 
ship, we believe that a cradle could be constructed to receive 
the ship and transport it the distance named without injury.” 

This is certainly not damaging testimony to the ship 
railway. The Atlantic works of Boston are also quoted. 
They start with this declaration: “ Our positive ignorance 
of this matter throughout, forbids our expressing any 
opinion at length.” They say : “ Were it not that Captain 


19 


Eads has already done wonderful things we should not 
hesitate to declare this scheme impossible of execution.” 
This certainly modifies very much, any adverse opinion ad¬ 
vanced in the same letter. 

Under the head of “ Opinion of Civil Engineers,” there 
is the statement that “ the Hon. John Conness, formerly of 
the United States Senate, has forwarded the following; 
expression of opinion of an able engineer: 6 Admiral 
Ammen’s testimony, before the select committee, tells the 
whole story, and puts Eads’ absurd project in its right 
light.’ ” As the name of this able engineer is not given to the 
public it is not necessary to quote his opinion further. 

The only civil engineer whose name is published by Messrs. 
Ammen and Phelps as doubting the practicability of a ship 
railway across the Isthmus of Tehuantepec is Mr. W. J. Mc- 
Alpine who, it is said, has written “That he regarded the 
Eads scheme quite as visionary as M. de Lesseps canal at the 
ocean level, and that he would discuss the subject without 
delay.” He is pronounced by Admiral Ammen “ one of our 
most eminent engineers,” and by Captain Phelps is further 
endorsed u as second to no engineer in this country.” Mr. 
McAlpine’s opinion would have commanded greater weight 
if he had not been president of a convention of engineers 
at St. Louis in 1867, which unanimously declared that the 
long spans and deep foundations of the bridge I was then 
building, were totally impracticable. 


20 


Expert Testimony in Favor of the Ship Railway. 

To offset the adverse opinions of Messrs. McAlpine and 
Roach, who are really the only experts of weight referred 
to by Messrs. Ammen and Phelps, and to show how over¬ 
whelming is the expert testimony in favor of the Ship Rail¬ 
way, I submit the following letters. The first was pub¬ 
lished in the London Times by Hon. E. J. Reed, M. P. C. B., 
formerly Chief Constructor of the British Navy ; 


“ To the Loudon Times. 

“ I write to express the hope that the project of substituting a ship 
railway across the Isthmus of Panama for the costly canal which is in 
contemplation, referred to in the letter of your Philadelphia corre¬ 
spondent in the Times of this day, will receive in this country and in 
France the consideration which it well deserves. 1 have for some 
time past had under consideration a similar scheme of my own for 
conveying ships across the north of the great peninsula of Florida, 
and although I have not had leisure to develop it sufficiently to jus¬ 
tify me in putting it in detail before the public, I have gone a long 
way toward satisfying myself that it is a feasible plan and highly 
economical in comparison with a ship canal. 

“ Mr. Eads, who has now announced and advocated the plan in 
America, is an engineer of the greatest ability, distinguished alike 
by the greatness of his engineering conceptions and by the theoret¬ 
ical and practical knowledge which he brings to bear upon their de¬ 
velopment. I first made his acquaintance in connection with war 
vessels and machinery constructed during the American war, and 
found him most able in grasping the essentials of the war-ship prob¬ 
lem and in the application of steam to the objects in view. He has 
since given abundant evidence of engineering skill in other spheres 
and on larger scales. 

“ It may not be generally known that this country has done much 
in the way of lifting vessels bodily from one level to another, both in 
the case of the hydraulic docks of Mr. Edwin Clark and in the Ander- 
ton barge-lift in Cheshire, where the Bridgewater Canal and the 
River Weaver (of which the former is forty feet above the latter) are 
placed in working communication by the raising and lowering of 
pontoons with vessels afloat within them. I am satisfied that by 
modifying the plans of these hydraulic operations and greatly aug- 
menting their scale, and by interposing railroad communication be- 


21 


tween the seas to be connected, ships can be conveyed across inter¬ 
vening' land, and much less expensively than by canal, where the 
distance to be traversed is great. E. J. REED.” 

The following is from one of the oldest and ablest con¬ 
structors in the United States navy. 


Mr. James Z>. Eads. 


Orange, New Jersey, Jan. 22, 1881. 


Dear Sir : I have watched with great interest the efforts you are 
making to establish communication between the Gulf of Mexico and 
the Pacific Ocean for sea-going vessels by means of a ship railway. 
In this effort I sincerely hope you will have success. With a sub¬ 
stantial road-bed for your railway, on the easy grades across Tehuan¬ 
tepec, which, I understand, do not exceed one or two feet in the 
hundred, there can be no mechanical difficulty in the way of trans¬ 
porting loaded ships by railroad with entire safety to the vessel, 
whether they be built of wood or iron. With a sufficient number of 
rails on the road-bed, and a sufficient number of wheels to distribute 
the weight in the manner proposed by you, the transportation of a 
fully-loaded vessel without straining her hull will be assured. The 
speed with which you can move the vessel will depend entirely upon 
the size and number of your locomotives. What weight and power 
they should possess to move the largest vessels used in commerce at 
a speed of ten miles an hour, over your maximum grades, is a matter 
which experienced railroad engineers will be able to determine with 


great accuracy. 

The ship-railway plan possesses the advantage of more rapid tran¬ 
sit for the vessels, and its capacity could easily be increased to meet 
the future wants of commerce. 

Very truly yours, 

EDWARD HARTT, 
United States Naval Constructor. 


The following is from another United States naval con- 
structor, of recognized ability and talent. 

Philadelphia, February 7, 1881. 
James E. Eads, Esq., Washington, D. C.\ 

Dear Sir : Having carefully examined the plans and papers per¬ 
taining to your proposed ship railway across the Isthmus of Tehuan¬ 
tepec, I do not hesitate to to say that in my judgment there will be 
no difficulty whatever in transporting, in the manner you propose, 
any properly built vessel with absolute safety. 

Your railway will possess one quite important advantage over the 
ordinary canal, and that is, that the vessel’s bottom, propeller, etc., 
can be examined and if necessary cleaned in transit, and repairs of 


whatsoever nature can be made wherever it is practicable to con¬ 
struct suitable sidings, transfer tables, shops, etc., more economically, 
other things being equal, than in a dry-dock. 

Your well known skill as a scientific and practical engineer is a 
sufficient guarantee that this great undertaking will receive careful 
consideration in every detail, and that it will be a success, both as an 
engineering achievement and a financial investment. 

Wishing you all the success possible, I remain 
Your obedient servant, 


H. L. FERNALD. 
Naval Constructor, U. 8. N. 


The following is from tlio President of the Mississippi 
Liver Commission : 


New York, January 21, 1881. 
James B. Eads, JJsq., Washington, I). C. : 

Dear Sir : I have to acknowledge the receipt of your note of the 
17th instant, relating to your project of a ship railway across the 
Isthmus of Tehuantepec. 

In my judgment the construction of a ship railway across the Mexi¬ 
can isthmus, in general accordance with your plan, is not only feasi¬ 
ble as an engineering problem, but the successful maintenance and 
operation of such a road is entirely practicable as a business enter¬ 
prise. This assumes that your engineers will find a route of suitable 


alignment and grades, a question of prompt and easy solution, upon 
which your information is much greater and better than mine. 

In pushing forward this great project I wish you that full measure 
of complete success which your will, energy, and prestige as an en¬ 
gineer are so well calculated to command. 

Very respectfully, your obedient servant, 

Q. A. GI ELMORE, 

Lieut.-Col. Engineers, Brevet Major-Gen. 


Tlie following is a letter written by Mr. Henry Flad, a 
distinguished civil engineer, president of the board of publi c 
works in St. Louis : 


To E. W. Fox, Esq., 

Publisher “Exporter and Importer ,” St. Louis, Mo. : 

Dear Sir: In reply to your request that I give my views in regard 
to the ship railroad proposed by Captain James B. Eads, I beg to 
state my opinions: 

First. That the first cost of the construction of a ship railroad will 
not be one-fourtli of that of a ship canal. 

Second. 1 hat a ship railroad can be constructed in probably one- 
third of the time required to construct a canal. 


23 


Third. That ships can be transported on such a railroad with ab¬ 
solute safety, and with the same dispatch as through a canal. 

Fourth. That the cost of maintenance will be less for a railroad 
than for the canal. 

Fifth. That although the cost of transferring ships by railroad will 
exceed that of passing them through a canal, the difference will be 
insignificant compared with the saving of interest on the first cost. 

Sixth. That the ship railroad will, therefore, offer a safer and 
better investment for capital. 

Very respectfully, 

HENRY FLAD, C. E. 


Mr. 0. Chanute, tlie accomplished and experienced civil 
engineer, who is superintendent of the Erie railway, says in 
a letter to me, “ I am much pleased to find in this morning's 
Tribune your very able and clear presentation of a scheme 
for a marine railway across the isthmus; the rather as I 
gave some attention to the subject myself nearly a year ago, 
and reached conclusions almost identical with yours, as to 
the feasibility and general features of the project * * * 

I see no reason why the railway should not be worked at 
ten miles per hour, and assuming it to be sixty miles long, 
why a steamer cannot be transferred from ocean to ocean in 
twelve hours.” 


The following is a letter addressed to me by Commodore 
It. W. Shufeldt, U. S. H., the accomplished officer who sur¬ 
veyed the Isthmus of Tehuantepec : 

Washington, D. C., Jan. 21. 
Mr. James E. Eads, Washington, 1). C.: 

Dear Sir: I forward to you with great pleasure, an extract of a 
letter from Commodore Farquliar, commanding United States ship 
Quinnebaug, at present at Alexandria, Egypt. 

^ jff sfc Jff Tif # * * # 

“ I am of the opinion that Tehuantepec possesses the best route for 
transit. 1 do not see why a railroad, capable of carrying a ship could 
not be built, and why the long slopes of our route should not be best. 
The fact of a harbor twenty-five miles long, on the Atlantic side, is 
of the utmost importance, more so than the one on the Pacific shore, 
because that is almost always a weather shore in that latitude.” 

I send you the extract as a disinterested opinion of an accomplish¬ 
ed naval officer, not only as to the advantages of the route of Telman- 


\ 


24 


tepee, but as to the practicability of a ship railway across the Isth¬ 
mus. 


Very truly yours, 


R. W. SHUFELDT, U. S. N. 


The well-known and able civil engineer, Colonel C. Shaler 
Smith, in a letter last year, said of the ship-railway, to the 
editor of the Exporter and Importer : 


“ The engineering problems involved have all been solved on a 

smaller scale, in the construction of various works in this country 

and in Europe, during the past thirty years, and the adaptation of 

these tried and proved principles of mechanical design to the case in 

hand is by no means difficult. 

***** 

“ It will be a serious reflection on the enterprise of American cap¬ 
italists, the science of American engineers, and the patriotism of our 
statesmen, if foreign capital and foreign skill are to perform the work 
of severing our continents and then pocketing the profits of an enter¬ 
prise most of the cost of which must eventually be paid by our citi¬ 
zens in the shape of tolls upon our bi-oceanic coasting trade.” 


The following is from a member of the Mississippi River 
Commission, formerly State engineer of Louisiana, and an 
engineer of acknowledged ability : 


New Orleans, Feb. 9. 1881. 

Dear Captain : Your letter of February 3rd, in answer to mine is 
just received after •‘accidents by flood and field.” The most'terrrific 
gales on record have destroyed many miles of our eastern railroad 
connections. I wish we had as stable a transit as your inter-oceanic 
railway project promises to give. I have followed carefully the de¬ 
velopment of the designs for this enterprise with increasing confi¬ 
dence in their practicability and correctness. It seems to me to have 
the great merits of excluding the necessarily uncertain elements in 
the estimate for any canal; of relying upon the experience of success¬ 
ful engineering works differing from this only in magnitude; of 
avoiding a direct and dangerous conflict with natural obstacles such 
as the damming or diversion of water courses, the control of floods, 
&c.; of latitude in choice of location resulting in stability and econ¬ 
omy ; of facility and rapidity of construction maintenance andrepair, 
and of an easy extension of capacity proportioned to an increased 
trade. These points together with its extremely favorable geograph¬ 
ical location give the ship-railway, in my judgment, a decided advan¬ 
tage over other plans for isthmus transit. I shall impatiently wait 
for the first through train. Very truly, 


B. M. IIARROD. 


25 


The following is from Mr. T. C. Clarke, of the firm of 
Clarke, Reves & Co., one of the most able and successful 
railroad and bridge engineers in the United States: 

“I am desirous that my opinion should be put on record that your 
ship railway is practicable to construct, and can be maintained as 
easily as any other railway having as large a tonnage; and that ves¬ 
sels of four thousand tons can be carried across without injury to 
themselves or their cargoes.” 

The following is from Gen. G. T. Beauregard, formerly a 
member of the United States Corps of Engineers: 

New Orleans, January 25,1881. 

My Dear Sir: I take pleasure in communicating to you in as few 
words as possible my views relative to the practicability and economy 
of a ship railway across the Isthmus of Tehuantepec. I feel no hesi¬ 
tancy in saying that 1 see no difficulty in constructing a railway 
strong enough to carry out the object referred to. It is only a ques¬ 
tion of the strength of the cradle to hold the ship and the division of 
weight on a sufficient number of rails and wheels, which can certainly 
be accomplished by any engineer of ability and ingenuity. 

As to the danger a loaded ship would incur in being transported on 
a smooth and well-built railway, it is all imaginary, for it would be 
well braced and cushioned in a strong car or platform, supported by 
spiral steel springs on a very large number of wheels which, being 
separate from each other, could be easily replaced if broken during 
the trip. Moreover, the breaking of one or a few of them out of so 
many would not endanger the rest. 

With regard to the economy of such a ship rail way I would remark 
that the tonnage carried over it being moved entirely by machinery, 
and the ratio of paying cargo to dead weight being much greater 
than on ordinary railroads, the cost of operating such a railway must 
be much less. The cost of maintenance should be also less in pro¬ 
portion, for the road would be substantially built and short in com¬ 
parison to the amount of tonnage carried over it. Moreover, the 
machinery used would be simple and substantially made. It is there¬ 
fore safe to assume that the current expenses and those of mainte¬ 
nance would not exceed 50 per cent, of the gross receipts, which 
would be more profitable than from a canal costing probably two or 
three times more than a ship railway, and requiring three or four 
times longer to build, thereby increasing greatly the amount of inter¬ 
est alone on the actual cost of the canal. 

A ship raslway has other important advantages over a canal, such 
as the facility with which the number of trucks could be increased to 
accommodate the demands of commerce ; the rapidity of transit and 
the greater number of vessels per day that could be transported than 
through a canal; the practicability of building a railway where a 


26 


canal would be impossible; the ability of estimating correctly for 
the first, while the latter if partially built under the water or liable 
to be submerged or interrupted by water would be very difficult, if 
not impossible, to be estimated for as to cost and time of completion. 

1 am yours very truly, 

G. T. BEAUREGARD. 


Mr. J. J. Williams, a very able engineer, with long ex¬ 
perience in railroad building, who has made a number of 
surveys for railroads on the Isthmus of Tehuantepec, says: “I 
have been greatly interested in your proposition to construct a 
ship railway across the Isthmus of Tehuantepec for the trans¬ 
portation of the largest class of merchant vessels. Having 
carefully examined the details of your plans for accomplish¬ 
ing the object, and being thoroughly familiar with the to¬ 
pography of the Isthmus, I desire to express my full convic¬ 
tion of their entire practicability.'’ 

Mr. E. L. Corthell, the engineer of the bridge across the 
Mississippi River at Louisiana, and of the Sny Island Im¬ 
provement Works, and who was resident engineer at the 
Jetties until their completion, writes as follows: “My studies 
of the engineering difficulties convince me that they can be 
easily overcome, and I believe the ship-railway for the trans¬ 
portation overland of the largest vessels can be made entirely 
successful, and that ships can be transported more rapidly 
by the railway than by the canal, and with equal safety/’ 

The following is from one of the engineers sent by the 
United States to Europe to investigate the improvement of 
the mouths of rivers there, and to report upon the jetty sys¬ 
tem. He is likewise an experienced railroad engineer : 


Richmond, February 5, 1881. 

James />. Fads, Fsq. 

My Dear Sir : Wliy should not your ship-railway be practicable? 
Ships have been hauled on marine railways for I know not how many 
years, and the hauling of larger ships a longer distance is only a de¬ 
velopment or expansion of this practice, as the steel roadway worked 
by locomotives is the developement of the tramway or the old incline 
worked by stationary power. 

The idea is worthy of the age, and to make it a success you have 
simply to improve and expand the details of the old marine railway 




27 


and make it more perfect. I have the greatest confidence in your 
ability in this particular, and hope you will have the opportunity to 
demonstrate it. 

Very truly yours, 

H. D. WHITCOMB. 

Civil Engineer in charge of Improvement of James River. 

The following is from the engineer in charge of the im¬ 
provement of the Missouri River: 


United States Engineer’s Office, 


1351 Washington Avenue, 

St. Louis, January 31, 1881. 

Dear Captain : I have watched with much interest the develop¬ 
ment of your plan for the construction of a ship-railway across the 
Isthmus. The project has great and obvious advantages to recom¬ 
mend it; and from an engineering point of view, it is, in my opinion, 
perfectly practicable. The various operations contemplated are con¬ 
stantly being performed, on a small scale at least, at all the great sea¬ 
ports of the world, and any difficulties which might attend their ex¬ 
tension to the scale you propose, could, I think, be readily met by 
suitable mechanical devices. The construction, maintenance, and 
operation of the railroad are quite within the resources of our pro¬ 


fession. 

With my best wishes for your success, 1 am, Captain, 

Yours very truly, 

CHAS. R. SUTER, 
Major of Engineers, U. S. A. 
Capt. James B. Eads, Washington, J). C. 


The City Engineer of Pittsburg, a gentleman who has had 
an extensive practical experience in engineering works, has 
sent the following: 


City Engineer’s Office, 
Pittsburg, Pa., January 31, 1881. 

James B. Eads, Esq.: 

Dear Sir : I heartily indorse the project of a ship railway across 
the “ cord of the continents ” in preference to a canal. My reasons 
are that it will not cost more than about one-third as much as a canal 
with locks ; it will not require more than one-half of the time to con¬ 
struct it that will be consumed in the construction of the canal; it 
will cost less to maintain and operate it than a canal, and the facili¬ 
ties of transportation can be much more readily, cheaply and advan ¬ 
tageously increased on the railway than on a canal when the neces¬ 
sities of commerce require it, and the very “leviathans of the mer¬ 
chant marine ” can be transported more easily and with as much 


28 


safety on the railway as through the canal, and without any break of 
cargo or any danger thereto. It would extend this letter to too great 
a length to give figures to ratify the statement herein made, but they 
will substantiate it to the full, and I further state that if the profits 
of the “canal investment” would amount to “live per cent.,” those 
of the railway project would amount to not less than twenty per 
cent, on the investment, and very probably more; yea, it would be a 
paying investment under circumstances of disastrous loss to the 
canal projectors; therefore, in view of all the considerations con¬ 
nected therewith, I have come to the conclusion above embodied. 

Hoping that you may succeed in procuring the necessary encourage¬ 
ment and substantial aid that the importance of the project demands, 
so that you may be enabled to demonstrate practically the truth of 
the above and verify the assertions made, 

I am, most respectfully, etc., 

II. DEMPSTER, 

City Engineer. 

The following is from the distinguished civil engineer 
who is now Dean of the Department of Civil Engineering in 
Cornell University. lie was the Chief Engineer of Commo¬ 
dore Shufeldt’s surveying expedition in 1872 : 


Department of Civil Engineering, 

Cornell University, 
Ithaca, JSf. T., February 4th, 1881. 

Capt. James B. Eads: 

Dear Sir : My surroundings during the past ten years have cut 
me out from taking active part in the discussions upon trans-isthmian 
routes ; but I have never lost my great interest in this matter, nor 
doubted what I have put on record several times, viz : “Tehuantepec 
will be open to the world earlier than any other route.” This con¬ 
viction is owing to the fact that I have made a thorough, disinter¬ 
ested, honest and patriotic study of nearly all the bearings of this 
important question, and my conclusions are almost mathematically 
correct. When vour Ship Railway project appeared and was ridi¬ 
culed by inconsiderate engineers, I made computationswliich proved 
conclusively to my mind that the “ Great Eastern” could be carried 
safely overland upon rails, with less strain to her timbers than in 
any of her sea voyages. There can be no difficulty about wheel-base 
enough to support a weight that has been supported in the ways of 
any dock ; or about rails upon which to roll the weight; or power to 
draw it at any desirable speed ; and all this, with absolute safety to 
the keel, ribs and joint points of any vessel (yet built) and trans¬ 
ported out ol water. No bridge that is now in use undergoes the 
bendings, tv istings, and shaking that any vessel is bound to with- 


29 


stand, upon a rough sea, without opening a seam; and yet, no one 
doubts the practicability of transporting a truss by rail. In fact, 
every railroad car is a clumsily made truss. I am well acquainted 
with the data obtained, and supposed to have been obtained, to within 
a few years, upon the subject; and I am perfectly familiar with every 
possible point through which a canal could be located at Tehuante¬ 
pec. 

I am sure it is easy to prove that all routes outside of the Gulf of 
Mexico will be detrimental to the most vital interests of the United 
States and a source of great danger to our national stability. But the 
people at large have not had a fair opportunity to study this question 
so as to place more faith upon its merits than upon the men advocat¬ 
ing the routes proposed. Time must take its course to allow the spe¬ 
cific truth of this case to survive the machinations of partisanship. 
But the time has now arrived for effective work and determined ac¬ 
tion ; and I thank God that your brain, reputation and sledge-hammer 
has been set to work to batter the Isthmus into an American high¬ 
way. I can assure you, upon knowledge of every inch of the ground, 
that you will find no difficulty about curves, grades, or bridges. The 
ascent of the Atlantic slope will offer no more difficulties than the 
Hudson River R. R.; and, as on the Pacific side, either one of the 
three passes in the neighborhod of Tarifa or Chivela will allow of no 
steeper grade than 25 to 35 feet per mile to bring you down to the Pa¬ 
cific plains. The ground offers you 50 miles to get down in, and 
as much more as you may wish by following the hillside. All the 
bridges required will be of comparatively short spans. You will find 
very little anxious work on either terminal harbor, very little tenta¬ 
tive work being required, and permanence without ulterior compli¬ 
cations will reward almost any kind of attack. The drainage of the 
works; building materials, (including excellent, cement-yielding, 
dolomitic limestone, between San Miguel and Tarifa;) abundant 
native labor ; a remarkably healthy climate, &c., will be all you may 

desire. 

I think the estimate of tonnage upon which you base your reasons 
for the safety of the Government in guaranteeing three per cent, 
semi-annual dividends is quite modest, since in spite of official statis 
tics I believe the road will handle 30,000 tons daily very soon after its 
being opened. 

The discussion of this question is long, and my letter is growing 
likew ise long. 

I write to you to give you encouragement to push ou this matter 
with all your might. 1 have no personal motive to subserve; my 
field is here for a life time, which I fear will be too short for my pur¬ 
pose. Therefore, if I have bothered you, you at least can say this is 
a case of disinterested boring. 

If I can be of any service to you command me, and I will be glad 
to furnish any data upon unpublished notes or surveys 1 have; and 


30 


be sure you have my most sincere wishes for the happy issue of your 
undertaking. 


Very truly yours, 


E. A. FUERTES. 


In discussing: the merits of the several Isthmian routes 
before the Merchants’ Exchange, in St. Louis, pending the 
unanimous adoption by that body of resolutions recommend¬ 
ing the favorable consideration of the Ship Railway to the 
Government, Captain Silas Bent, a gentleman who has de¬ 
voted much study to the winds and currents of the ocean, 
and who was formerly an officer of the United States Uavy, 
made the following remarks: 

a 


“ Merc statements of the difference in miles is a very inadequate 
measure of the difference in time that would be occupied by sailing- 
vessels in making these several passages, and when we consider that 
three-fourths of the ocean commerce of the world is carried in sail¬ 
ing-vessels, you can see what an important factor this question of 
sailing-time becomes in the solution of the problem before us. 

“ The northeast trade-winds which extend across the Atlantic are 
so broken and interrupted when they encounter the West India 
Islands, that they never penetrate,the Caribbean Sea; but the north¬ 
west portion of them, however, do extend into the Gulf of Mexico, 
and often so far down as to reach well toward Tehuantepec, so that 
whilst in the Gulf winds are always found, yet the Caribbean Sea re¬ 
mains a region of almost relentless calms. 

“Nor is this all, for the mountain ranges, extending the length of 
the Isthmus of Panama and through Central America, offer a still 
more formidable barrier to the passage of these winds, thus throwing 
them still higher into the upper regions of the atmosphere, and ex¬ 
tending these calms far out into the Pacific Ocean, on the parallel of 
Panama, with lessening width, for fifteen or eighteen hundred miles 
to the northwest, along the coast of Central America. 

“ This whole region of! calms, both in the Caribbean Sea and in the 
Pacific Ocean, is so well known to navigators that sailing-vessels 
always shun it, if possible, though they may have to run a thousand 
miles out of their way to do so. 

“ This absence of wind of course leaves this vast area exposed to 
the unmitigated heat of a torrid sun, except when relieved momenta¬ 
rily by harassing squalls in the dry season, and by the deluging rain¬ 
falls of the wet season. With these meteorological facts in view, 
let us now suppose that the Lesseps Canal at Panama, and the 
Eads Kailway at Tehuantepec are both completed and in running 
oidel ; then let us start two sailing-ships of equal tonnage and 


31 


equal speed from the mouth of the Mississippi, with cargo for 
China, one to go by the way of the Panama Canal, and the other by 
the way of the Tehuantepec Railway, and I venture to affirm that 
by the time the Panama vessel has cleared the canal and floats in the 
waters of the Pacific, the Tehuantepec vessel will have scaled the 
Isthmus and be well on to the meridian of the Sandwich Islands; and 
that before the former vessel can worry through the fifteen or more 
hundred miles of windless ocean before her, to reach the trade winds 
to the westward of Tehuantepec, the latter will have sped five thou¬ 
sand miles on her way across the Pacific, and be fully thirty days 
ahead of her adversary. For it. is a fact worth mentioning here, that 
the strength of the northeast trade winds in the Pacific, as well as 
the maximum strength of the northern portion of the great equato¬ 
rial current in that ocean, are both found on or near the parallel of 
latitude of Tehuantepec, the former blowing with an impelling force 
to the westward of ten or twelve miles an hour, and the latter with 
a following strength of three or four miles per hour.” 

To my mind there is no difficulty in the way that cannot be readily 
overcome by engineering and mechanical skill, neither in the con¬ 
struction of the road nor in the necessary machinery to handle and 
carry vessels of any size and of and weight across the easy gradients 
of the Tehuantepec Isthmus. 

And I further believe that such a railway can be built at half the 
cost and in half the time—yes, in one-third the time—that any canal 
can be constructed; and that while the railway, for many reasons, 
would be of greater practical benefit to the commerce of the world at 
large than a canal, it would be in that locality of immeasurably 
greater advantage to both the commerce and the political well-being 
of our own country. 









% 

" ' '^ V M '■' -r : 

iv^rV ' v . >: ^ >•• r»>. y* ' /;• 

' oLt x ■ ' 




Vv 'rV-. - <'• A.# • - 

v • . v * - ~v> v ' ,✓ r- ■'• * 

, ' > ' >v- ,* *-■- .•" i’ V L 

••","*.u ■' ': ••• f-<> /''•;, 


y n 


/ • • N ; ■•/•>.•: « 


' X 





■ 

v ■•• • ■ 



• X. : -,y i:••■•' 

■ • <• :/•* ■ 







*? 



c - 1 . 

. v r 




■ / 


1*. . '• - y 


x 








;4 

V; - 



78 308 















I 























® • * ’ A . s 

0 0 “ 0 * 

<4* 



^0* 


( 


A°4 




^ 0 *V * 

^ v. * •-•’*</ V'.^V \^\^' 

0 . * * > V 4* V* % c\ ,0 A*°' O V vLM% 

■ ^ <£ * MA P o ^ a* * 

: ‘Mi: sr'V 

- A V ^ c^'V o 

V ^ ’aIw,' jy ^ °* ts ^ ^ 

,G V 

<A V c <>««„ -r* cF •'■'•• *6 

O jA . * -£ Cr 7~, •» O 




J> A 

* <l_v ‘^J. ° 

A O 

p,V L * * ^ 

/''J t - ■* 


4 c> 

•cl' 

J? <>„ # * - * ~ 
^ ^ ° " 0 0 ^ 



$ : 


C. vP 

V '■'V ° 

sp- o 

V <V 'o v **> ' 


O • * 






4 o■ 

•a? ^ 

* «wV ^ o 
^ .,, • A %---•> 

•> v' . A 





0 A * *>* 



s i- 0 ^ 

r> ^ 










v4> -A •* * * ® * -P v 

* ^ * ( cCvVa° ^ ^ 

: ^ v> • wA ° 

Vv>> 



C, vP 

* «> o 

' A <**. 



* C\ ,0 * * * °* 

► & 5* ♦ 

^ A * 


\p A 


% '••'** ,<v ^^T.T‘’ o^ V •'?.?•**A %■-.... 

° 0 . c J!^<v % o ° " 0 * *<?> ( 

N <, <foO\\A>,'!k * \j * ^ 4^ * * 'V r. 



*>* A 
o V 



O' 



r o v 


» jp-v '?2Mm £°*- *<*?>• jP-nt 

rv ^ y^v/P& * \y *%Alv\x\s> s v <y\ * <^y/\yw » .-a. -<* 

® .•;•*•-. *> v' .•v A % v s 




f. '*'T 7 T«- ’b A ' "> f.r 

q^ • 1 ' * ■* "'o -.y c °" ° * *<> * p.'J t #» . 

„ V C *a?/r?7?^ ° j"®’ ^ c,° 'LrrO^ + °o , 

• U O N 




v ^5 ^ ° x° v 1k 

‘••’•\^ *\'*•.•’* * 0 ° V ‘‘Tf,~’' A 1 

V .V.Va % ^ > *‘ 


k * 


a *'•••« 6 ^ 

<J> L / » 

r u t - ° 


•» o 



o <0 vv 
>» ^ > * 

* 0 

f° 

'• % <A ''mi/)k* % A ' 

* *„ 


,0^ t • ^‘ : * Z o 
C ^ a) 

’bv* 




* V *> ‘ 



A 

^ aP ' Y * 

T. A ^- ^ 

• ^ C^ 

- O' V 


° • y 



o y 


> "o . y * A <v ,0 — 

o _ C _J^^ * 0^ t « 1 ' e + ^o c 0 " 0 -* ^ 

* <?P ^ - ^ ^ ^ 

* ^ o. o % ‘Wf,* 

, „ « . . v* % 4?' * v *•••-*' 

♦ jAW/k** 'O. aV ^ ^ rCCvW A° 0 ^ * 

^ A V "V ■* HipW ° c,^ ^ ° -, 

* A <\ *'S.* t .<S o -o. * 

\ _., . ^ _A ... *>*. 


f o° \^-\y V'™-/ 


.0 


o 

o 




0° 



» o n 


















